|
Events Post your HS event or find an event near you |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
First of all, I just have to say thanks to all the volunteers, you guys did a great job! I might be able to help out a bit next year. Second, I have to agree with funrun and UPC on the use of point differentials, swiss seems to work just fine to me. I also think that spring thaw is quite difficult to move on compared to some of the other tournament maps.
Anyways, thats just my . 8 RotV, 2 MTCB, 4 SotM, 2 BftU, 5 RttFF, 4 VW, 3 TT, 9 FotA, 3 TJ, 2+ of each Unique, 3+ of each Common/Uncommon Want to count your 'scape? http://www.heroscapers.com/community...ad.php?t=32267 |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
“Heroscapers is too old for that crap.” ~IamBatman "Hahahah! You losers! I told you so!!" ~Clancampbell |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
What about making a win by total victory 3 points, a point win 2 points and a tie one point?
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
<just home>
It was, over all, a great event, GB; so the first dominant comment I have is (other than security), "It ain't broken." Now, events need to strictly start on time and end on time, with the start being any explanations for that event. Breaks should be built into the schedule. It may mean reducing the number of rounds in an event, but I think that would be worth it in the long run. There were some instances of poor sportsmanship and some instances of play style differences that were perceived as being poor sportsmanship. Those are difficult to sort out, unless obvious. I'm not at all sure an official sanction against certain behaviors (other than obvious cheating) is worth the huge hassle that it would cause...I certainly would not want to be the judge in such cases! I have no problem with the point differential method. It may well have the weaknesses that others have argued for, but it is swift and efficient, and if everyone knows in advance that that is the way things are going to be, they can practice and adjust their style of play accordingly. The only legitimate complaint was that circumstances this year did not allow people to know ahead of time. I'd say, use this method next year. Okay, that's enough of my verbage. I had a great time, and it was the people that made it great. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
I see UPC's point. If you use Finn, Thorgrim, and Eldgrim as meatshield/glyphs then the point differential isn't that fair. But I also see GB's point - that there needs to be some impetus to play the game rather than to sit paralyzed by permutations.
And damja's points idea may be the best idea as a bridge between both school's of thought. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
I have been known to time out at a fairly frequent pace and I have played players that also time out frequently. In all 21 games I played this weekend, none of the players I played were purposely stalling. I think it is wrong to say that a slower, methodical player is purposely stalling to protect their point advantage. I ask that we look at the same situation with the same players when they are behind or even on points. I think we will find that their style of play was consistent regardless of whether they were winning or losing. Knowing most of the players very well and participating in most of the events, I have to say that the assumption and assertion that a player was exploiting a loophole in the tourney by knowingly stalling when the have the point advantage is a bit of a reach. This is not what I have seen. Those players played at the same pace regardless of whether they were winning or losing; that is proof positive that they were not imploring stalling tactics. Now if a player plays fast when behind and slow when ahead, then I think we have a case. I did not see that at any point and I doubt any player who complained could honestly say that any player in question sped up or slowed down.
There is an element that needs to be considered here and that is the emotional state of a player who has lost because they couldn't make up the points. One's perception of the situation is clouded by the frustration or emotion of losing. I have been on both sides of this issue and I can say with the utmost confidence I have never encountered a player that was speeding up or slowing down based on their spot in the game. We are scapers; we are better than that. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
It is not about your perceptions of things as much as others. When folks start to complain about something that previously brought no complaints then it is worth exploring. Somebody who runs the clock out every single game will get complaints and many folks will perceive them as stallers. Especially if they have eaten up much more time than the other player. If you sit down to the table, and you only get 20 minutes of playtime, because your opponent used much more time and got 40 minutes, then he has an unfair and excessively indulgent advantage. We do not want to then make matters worse by rewarding that player on top of his excesses.
“Heroscapers is too old for that crap.” ~IamBatman "Hahahah! You losers! I told you so!!" ~Clancampbell |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
The other side of this coin is that point differential creates incentive to not concede a game thus making it take longer to finish it or taking it to time.
In a straight up Swiss tournament, a player with 6 rats versus a full health Charos may well concede or at least attack Charos. In a point differential tournament, a player might feel the need to protect those 80 points even though they are going to lose. They run those rats away to hide so that the point differential isn't as large. This actually creates a situation where a game that probably would have been called or ended quicker doesn’t because they are protecting points for the overall tournament. Now that player is playing to an element that has nothing to do with the game they are in yet the game is being prolonged because of it. The player has clearly lost, and in no way can win, yet they are still playing a game and turtling their last few cards to protect 80 points because they may feel they need later in the tournament to make the cut off. Is that a good thing? I think not |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
“Heroscapers is too old for that crap.” ~IamBatman "Hahahah! You losers! I told you so!!" ~Clancampbell |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I do completely understand the irritation of playing against someone employing stalling tactics. Heck, I get irritated sometimes playing people who are just plan slow, but that is my own Pet Peeve to deal with ) I agree that if turtling/stalling is a problem that has been brought to light, it certainly needs to be addressed, but I completely disagree with the means of limiting it (Point Differential). I also agree that the notion of Keep It Simple, Stupid should be applied whenever and wherever possible, but I think that there has got to be a better way to limit stalling than to punish other people's playing styles. I definitely see the quandry, but I don't know how to fix it. I just think the answer is being searched for in the wrong direction... UPC's Heroscape Strategy Blog (and whatever else the Muse sends my way...) |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Protecting those points might be in poor form and that player would probably be considered a bad sport; I agree. My point is that using the point differential creates an incentive for a person who can not possibly win to keep a game alive to protect some points in the overall tournament. Those points could create quite a difference in their ranking. I certainly could not fault a player who has only one loss coming in the last game for running his stuff off to hide so that his points don't fall as much. Bad form? Sure, but the tourney is set up that way. Swiss does not create that incentive. |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
“Heroscapers is too old for that crap.” ~IamBatman "Hahahah! You losers! I told you so!!" ~Clancampbell |
|
|